The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today the filing of a one-count information charging John Suhan, age 48, of Lemont, Pennsylvania, with structuring transactions to evade federal reporting requirements, with funds totaling $372,321. Pursuant to a plea agreement filed with the information, Suhan has agreed to waive indictment by a grand jury, plead guilty to the offense, and agree to criminal forfeiture of $3,180 in currency recovered from his residence.

According to United States Attorney Peter J. Smith, the information charges that starting in or around January 2006, a relative of Suhan’s wife gave him and his wife a sum of cash totaling approximately $372,321 generated from a family business. At the time Suhan received the cash, the relative allegedly told him that he would have serious problems and would get in trouble with governmental authorities if he were to make any bank deposits with the money which exceeded $10,000. To avoid making a deposit over $10,000, beginning in January 2006 and continuing through September 2011, Suhan allegedly made in excess of 200 separate deposits of the cash hoard totaling $352,740.02 at the main and branch office locations of Penn State Federal Credit Union and SPE Credit Union where he maintained accounts. He kept $3,180 in currency inside a safe at his residence, cash that FBI agents seized.

The case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and prosecution has been assigned to Assistant United States Attorney George J. Rocktashel.

Indictments and criminal onformations are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.

A sentence following a finding of guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

In this case, the maximum penalty under the federal statute is five years’ imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public, and provide for the defendant’s educational, vocational, and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.